On October 29, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, a petition filed by several states and coal companies attacking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA’s) regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Court’s holding in this case would determine EPA’s continued ability to use the CAA—including the national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) program—as a climate change tool. The Court saved its ruling until June 30, 2022, the last day of a drama-filled term. This Comment summarizes the Court's ruling and examines how its specific and more general analyses apply to NAAQS and other CAA provisions, concluding that NAAQS and several other regulatory options—particularly EPA’s proposed methane regulations—remain viable. It also explores the relevance of regulatory options in light of the newly enacted Inflation Reduction Act, adopted just a month and a half after the Court’s ruling.

On the final day of the 2021-2022 term, the U.S. Supreme Court released its decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency. The majority (6-3) opinion limited the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants under Clean Air Act §111(d), in part by invoking the “major questions doctrine.” The decision has implications for EPA’s authority both to regulate emissions from stationary sources and to regulate greenhouse gases more broadly. It also has implications for administrative law generally, including how the U.S. Congress may delegate regulatory authority to any federal agency. On July 12, 2022, the Environmental Law Institute hosted a panel of experts that considered questions raised by the justices’ opinions, and discussed what the decision will mean for environmental law, administrative law, and EPA’s power to act on climate change.